Some topics tend to get heated and go off track in unwholesome ways quite quickly. The "hot topics" sub-forum is a place where such topics may be moved so that each post must be manually approved by moderator before it will become visible to members.

i am a woman but i like women. is it really bad? it seems like a bad karma since i often feel that i have a harder life than heterosexual persons, and if anybody is other than normal it can brings some difficulties in the person's life.and since it is a bad karma then is gay and lesbian sex are bad to the mind - and makes the Path slower?

There is nothing wrong with being homosexual!You didn't choose to be homosexual so it isn't kamma, although engaging in the act is, it could be a Vipaka (fruition, result) of something (no one could tell what).

This is the life you have, and you can act in accord with the principles of the precepts (and other homosexuals do in homosexual relationships), and not let others dictate how you should feel about yourself. Or you can deny and repress yourself to fit into what you think people expect and not be who you are.

This offering maybe right, or wrong, but it is one, the other, both, or neither!Blog,-Some Suttas Translated,Ajahn Chah."Others will misconstrue reality due to their personal perspectives, doggedly holding onto and not easily discarding them; We shall not misconstrue reality due to our own personal perspectives, nor doggedly holding onto them, but will discard them easily. This effacement shall be done."

As others have shown, from a Buddhist perspective homosexuality is not condemned.

However, the standards of many societies do have norms somewhere along the lines of "homosexuality is bad". In some countries, homosexuals can even be lawfully put to death for their homosexuality. So maybe what you're feeling and/or what that monk is saying is conditioned by some societal condemnation.

This 'teacher' is misrepresenting our tradition. If anyone is making bad kamma, it's him/her, for both that misrepresentation, and for making you feel bad about something there's absolutely nothing wrong with.

If you feel isolated feeling the way you do, there's an Internet Forum called 'empty closets' in which lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender folk can talk anonymously, support each other, and generally hang out. Here's a link:http://emptyclosets.com/forum/At the top of the site it says, "A safe online community for gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender people coming out" and my experience of it thus far confirms this as true.

I wish you well and hope you can just accept this aspect of your life. It is natural - for those of us who feel that way. Just as heterosexuality is natural for those who feel that way. Accept yourself as you are, and your life will get a whole lot richer and more joyful, as mine did (I'm a bisexual man, and a Buddhist - no problem).

TheNoBSBuddhist wrote:I'm sorry, but I am calling BS on this. [That being gay or a woman is a result of previous bad kamma.] And I'm the NoBS Buddhist. How in heaven's name does he know?? And honestly, with everyone here telling you that he's wrong, giving you references, teachings and articles to PROVE to you that he is wrong - why are you still giving him any credence whatsoever?? Quit making excuses or putting forward reasons - He is wrong!!

And I am calling BS on your opinion. No one has proved that he is wrong. He knows this, because unlike you, the elder has a good knowledge of the texts and Commentaries. One can find similar statements in books by other well-known elders, such as “What Kamma Is” by Sayādaw U Ṭhitila.

To complete the offence of un-chastity (sexual misconduct), four conditions are necessary, viz: the mind to enjoy the forbidden object, the attempt to enjoy, devices to obtain, and possession. The effects of un-chastity are: having many enemies, getting undesirable wives, birth as a woman or as an eunuch.

When elders make such statements, they are not just expressing their personal opinions as you are, nor do they have the knowledge of previous lives, but they do have knowledge of the texts and Commentaries.

Women suffer greater hardship than men do in this life — that is an undeniable fact even in liberal societies. Even nuns do not enjoy the same wide support that monks enjoy.

Women have to endure the effects of menstruation and childbirth. Gay men and women have to endure the additional suffering of rejection by their own parents or siblings, social ostracism, prejudice and discrimination in the workplace, and oppression from unjust laws in many countries. Those who know Buddhism well are neither sexist nor homophobic. They understand that sexual desire is the cause of birth, and that from birth the whole mass of suffering arises. Whether one is heterosexual, homosexual, or celibate, sexual desire leads to suffering.

They understand that the diversity of living beings is due to the diversity of their kamma, it is not just an accidental or random occurrence without any cause. They also understand that wholesome kamma always gives agreeable results, and that unwholesome kamma always gives disagreeable results. The concluding statement in De Silva's article shows the attitude of well-informed traditional Buddhists:

This had led some Western homosexuals to believe that homosexuality is quite accepted in Buddhist countries of South and South-east Asia. This is certainly not true. In such countries, when homosexuals are thought of at all, it is more likely to be in a good-humored way or with a degree of pity. Certainly the loathing, fear and hatred that the Western homosexual has so often had to endure is absent and this is due, to a very large degree, to Buddhism's humane and tolerant influence.

There is at least as much unwholesome kamma made by heterosexuals driven by craving as is done by homosexuals. Promiscuity, Adultery, Child molestation, Rape, etc., are all heavy unwholesome kamma. Homosexuals are no more and no less likely to commit sexual misconduct than heterosexuals, but they still have to suffer more due to societal prejudice.

culaavuso wrote: Conjecture about past lives does not seem to be particularly helpful to the path.

That would depend on how it is done. When we suffer injustice of any kind, we can reflect wisely that since it was not due to anything we did in this existence, that it may have been due to something done in a previous existence. Wise reflection will enable us to let go of enmity, and have compassion for the wrong-doer who is mistreating us.

It's easy to be happy and gay, as long as life goes one's own way,But the man worthwhile is the man with a smile,When everything goes dead wrong.

The OP made it quite clear that the Monk told her homosexuality is wrong, and that this present life is due to a specific circumstance in a previous life.

THAT'S what I call BS on.

There is absolutely no question whatsoever that virtually everyone on this board is better educated than I, on Sutta references and teachings. That, I have never denied; In fact, I have often confirmed it.... neither do I deny the content of the remainder of your post, but that's not the discussion here. The discussion is the unskillful way in which this Theravadan Monk has spoken to wolf1 and made her feel.

a teacher (i don't say name) told it to me that it is bad......he told to me that i did adultery in a past life and this is the reason.

I am speaking of his opinion. Because frankly, that's all it can be. Unless he indicated that his words were specifically connected to a specific sutta, and mentioned that, specifically - then he gave her his opinion.And I strongly disagree with it.

Please don't put Wrong Intentions into my mouth.Thanks.

You will not be punished FOR your 'emotions'; you will be punished BY your 'emotions'.

Pay attention, simplify, and (Meditation instruction in a nutshell) "Mind - the Gap." ‘Absit invidia verbo’ - may ill-will be absent from the word. And mindful of that, if I don't respond, this may be why....

TheNoBSBuddhist wrote:The OP made it quite clear that the Monk told her homosexuality is wrong, and that this present life is due to a specific circumstance in a previous life.

THAT'S what I call BS on.

There is absolutely no question whatsoever that virtually everyone on this board is better educated than I, on Sutta references and teachings. That, I have never denied; In fact, I have often confirmed it.... neither do I deny the content of the remainder of your post, but that's not the discussion here. The discussion is the unskillful way in which this Theravadan Monk has spoken to wolf1 and made her feel.

a teacher (i don't say name) told it to me that it is bad......he told to me that i did adultery in a past life and this is the reason.

I am speaking of his opinion. Because frankly, that's all it can be. Unless he indicated that his words were specifically connected to a specific sutta, and mentioned that, specifically - then he gave her his opinion.And I strongly disagree with it.

Please don't put Wrong Intentions into my mouth.Thanks.

The person you are addressing here, Bhikkhu Pesala, is a monk. He should be addressed as "bhante" or "venerable sir" or "reverend."

Rain soddens what is covered up,It does not sodden what is open.Therefore uncover what is coveredThat the rain will not sodden it. Ud 5.5

Bhante:The OP made it quite clear that the Monk told her homosexuality is wrong, and that this present life is due to a specific circumstance in a previous life.

THAT'S what I call BS on.

There is absolutely no question whatsoever that virtually everyone on this board is better educated than I, on Sutta references and teachings. That, I have never denied; In fact, I have often confirmed it.... neither do I deny the content of the remainder of your post, but that's not the discussion here. The discussion is the unskillful way in which this Theravadan Monk has spoken to wolf1 and made her feel.

a teacher (i don't say name) told it to me that it is bad......he told to me that i did adultery in a past life and this is the reason.

I am speaking of his opinion. Because frankly, that's all it can be. Unless he indicated that his words were specifically connected to a specific sutta, and mentioned that, specifically - then he gave her his opinion.And I strongly disagree with it.

Please don't put Wrong Intentions into my mouth.Thanks, Reverend.

Apologies for the added omissions.

Last edited by TheNoBSBuddhist on Fri Jun 20, 2014 9:06 am, edited 1 time in total.

You will not be punished FOR your 'emotions'; you will be punished BY your 'emotions'.

Pay attention, simplify, and (Meditation instruction in a nutshell) "Mind - the Gap." ‘Absit invidia verbo’ - may ill-will be absent from the word. And mindful of that, if I don't respond, this may be why....

TheNoBSBuddhist wrote:The discussion is the unskillful way in which this Theravadan Monk has spoken to wolf1 and made her feel.

But you don't know for a fact whether the way in which the monk spoke to her was unskillful (i.e. akusala).

If the monk told her matter-of-factly, without unwholesome volition "You are homosexual because you committed adultery in a past life," then that is not technically unskillful behavior. It is at worst faulty logic, a fallacy of affirming the consequent. ("The Buddha said adultery leads to homosexuality in the next life. You are homosexual, therefore you committed adultery in a past life.")

Unfortunately I have heard many commit this fallacy, both monks and laypeople alike.

TheNoBSBuddhist wrote:I'm sorry, but I am calling BS on this. [That being gay or a woman is a result of previous bad kamma.] And I'm the NoBS Buddhist. How in heaven's name does he know?? And honestly, with everyone here telling you that he's wrong, giving you references, teachings and articles to PROVE to you that he is wrong - why are you still giving him any credence whatsoever?? Quit making excuses or putting forward reasons - He is wrong!!

And I am calling BS on your opinion. No one has proved that he is wrong. He knows this, because unlike you, the elder has a good knowledge of the texts and Commentaries. One can find similar statements in books by other well-known elders, such as “What Kamma Is” by Sayādaw U Ṭhitila.

To complete the offence of un-chastity (sexual misconduct), four conditions are necessary, viz: the mind to enjoy the forbidden object, the attempt to enjoy, devices to obtain, and possession. The effects of un-chastity are: having many enemies, getting undesirable wives, birth as a woman or as an eunuch.

When elders make such statements, they are not just expressing their personal opinions as you are, nor do they have the knowledge of previous lives, but they do have knowledge of the texts and Commentaries.

Women suffer greater hardship than men do in this life — that is an undeniable fact even in liberal societies. Even nuns do not enjoy the same wide support that monks enjoy.

Women have to endure the effects of menstruation and childbirth. Gay men and women have to endure the additional suffering of rejection by their own parents or siblings, social ostracism, prejudice and discrimination in the workplace, and oppression from unjust laws in many countries. Those who know Buddhism well are neither sexist nor homophobic. They understand that sexual desire is the cause of birth, and that from birth the whole mass of suffering arises. Whether one is heterosexual, homosexual, or celibate, sexual desire leads to suffering.

They understand that the diversity of living beings is due to the diversity of their kamma, it is not just an accidental or random occurrence without any cause. They also understand that wholesome kamma always gives agreeable results, and that unwholesome kamma always gives disagreeable results. The concluding statement in De Silva's article shows the attitude of well-informed traditional Buddhists:

This had led some Western homosexuals to believe that homosexuality is quite accepted in Buddhist countries of South and South-east Asia. This is certainly not true. In such countries, when homosexuals are thought of at all, it is more likely to be in a good-humored way or with a degree of pity. Certainly the loathing, fear and hatred that the Western homosexual has so often had to endure is absent and this is due, to a very large degree, to Buddhism's humane and tolerant influence.

There is at least as much unwholesome kamma made by heterosexuals driven by craving as is done by homosexuals. Promiscuity, Adultery, Child molestation, Rape, etc., are all heavy unwholesome kamma. Homosexuals are no more and no less likely to commit sexual misconduct than heterosexuals, but they still have to suffer more due to societal prejudice.

culaavuso wrote: Conjecture about past lives does not seem to be particularly helpful to the path.

That would depend on how it is done. When we suffer injustice of any kind, we can reflect wisely that since it was not due to anything we did in this existence, that it may have been due to something done in a previous existence. Wise reflection will enable us to let go of enmity, and have compassion for the wrong-doer who is mistreating us.

It's easy to be happy and gay, as long as life goes one's own way,But the man worthwhile is the man with a smile,When everything goes dead wrong.

Bhante,

If a women is born among the Muoso (a matriarchal society in China) is that bad karma? And if a man is born there, is it good karma?

If a gay man is born among the Bedamini (a society that encourages gay sex), is that bad karma?

How many eunuchs are in the western democracies? People in the west never commited this kind of bad karma that supposedly leads to be born as an eunuch?

What I'm trying to say is that sexual misconduct must have negative outcomes. That was taught by the Buddha. But that these outcomes are not intrinsic to being a heterosexual man or woman, LGBT, etc. These outcomes are hardships that a person in those shoes has to go through. There is nothing intrinsicly wrong with being a heterosexual man or woman, or LGBT, because there are people in all of these situations born in favorable conditions and people in all of these situations born in unfavorable conditions, with respect to how people treat these aspects of a human being.

He turns his mind away from those phenomena, and having done so, inclines his mind to the property of deathlessness: 'This is peace, this is exquisite — the resolution of all fabrications; the relinquishment of all acquisitions; the ending of craving; dispassion; cessation; Unbinding.' (Jhana Sutta - Thanissaro Bhikkhu translation)

Modus.Ponens wrote:How many eunuchs are in the western democracies? People in the west never committed this kind of bad karma that supposedly leads to be born as an eunuch?

The word "eunuch" is just the translation of the Pāli word "Pandaka." The Sayādaw's article was written many years ago. All sexual deviants: homosexuals, bisexuals, transsexuals, and eunuchs are included under the term Pandaka. See The Buddhist Monastic Code for details.

TheNoBSBuddhist wrote:The discussion is the unskillful way in which this Theravadan Monk has spoken to wolf1 and made her feel.

But you don't know for a fact whether the way in which the monk spoke to her was unskillful (i.e. akusala).

If the monk told her matter-of-factly, without unwholesome volition "You are homosexual because you committed adultery in a past life," then that is not technically unskillful behavior. It is at worst faulty logic, a fallacy of affirming the consequent. ("The Buddha said adultery leads to homosexuality in the next life. You are homosexual, therefore you committed adultery in a past life.")

Unfortunately I have heard many commit this fallacy, both monks and laypeople alike.

I cannot question the monk or put such a supposition in front of him.I am going by what the OP has reported, and it seems that the encounter left her feeling uncomfortable, feeling guilty and that what she is therefore born into is some form of punishment.

I can only presume she is being honest about her feelings and how the encounter left her.If this is the way she has reacted, his approach was tactless and in my opinion, unskillful.

He may well be extremely knowledgeable about Dhammic teachings; but his interactive skills seem to leave a lot to be desired.

it is not enough to teach. It is essential to teach in such a way that pupils feel enriched and nourished by what they learn; not made to feel as if they are unwholesome and being punished.

You will not be punished FOR your 'emotions'; you will be punished BY your 'emotions'.

Pay attention, simplify, and (Meditation instruction in a nutshell) "Mind - the Gap." ‘Absit invidia verbo’ - may ill-will be absent from the word. And mindful of that, if I don't respond, this may be why....

Modus.Ponens wrote:How many eunuchs are in the western democracies? People in the west never committed this kind of bad karma that supposedly leads to be born as an eunuch?

The word "eunuch" is just the translation of the Pāli word "Pandaka." The Sayādaw's article was written many years ago. All sexual deviants: homosexuals, bisexuals, transsexuals, and eunuchs are included under the term Pandaka. See The Buddhist Monastic Code for details.

Bhante, The term 'deviant' is defined thus, in the World Oxford online dictionary:

Departing from usual or accepted standards, especially in social or sexual behaviour:

It seems to me that labelling people of different sexual behaviour, as 'deviants', is condemning them for having unacceptable standards, which seems unnecessarily harsh and judgemental....

Could one not find a more "user-friendly" term than 'deviant?

You will not be punished FOR your 'emotions'; you will be punished BY your 'emotions'.

Pay attention, simplify, and (Meditation instruction in a nutshell) "Mind - the Gap." ‘Absit invidia verbo’ - may ill-will be absent from the word. And mindful of that, if I don't respond, this may be why....

waterchan wrote:If the monk told her matter-of-factly, without unwholesome volition "You are homosexual because you committed adultery in a past life," then that is not technically unskillful behavior.

I don't care what 'volition' the monk had, what he said was not from the suttas, it was wrong, he should not have said it to wolf, and we here who are not so ignorant about these issues should not countenance such ignorance by justifying it in any way, especially as she has come here for help and support - just look at the title of her topic. In my case, I don't regard being bisexual as the result of bad kamma at all. I actually quite like it. I reckon I must have done something good to end up this way. So what if gays etc sometimes cop abuse? Lots of folks cop abuse. Many monks in Tibet got abused by the Chinese. Did they end up as monks due to bad kamma? This is ridiculous.

We are in the 21st Century here. Time to consign any trace of homophobia to the dustbin of history where it belongs.

Specifically referring to Thai Buddhism, it seems to refer almost entirely uniquely to members of the male gender, even though Western thinking has directed it and taken it to contain both genders...

Edited to add, this snippet also from the link Cooran posted.

As the Buddha seems to have had a profound understanding of human nature and have been remarkably free from prejudice, and as there is not evidence that homosexuals are any more libidinous or that they have any more difficulties in maintaining celibacy than heterosexuals, it seems unlikely that the Buddha would exclude homosexuals per se from the monastic life. The term pandaka therefore probably does not refer to homosexuals in general but rather to the effeminate, self-advertising and promiscuous homosexual.

You will not be punished FOR your 'emotions'; you will be punished BY your 'emotions'.

Pay attention, simplify, and (Meditation instruction in a nutshell) "Mind - the Gap." ‘Absit invidia verbo’ - may ill-will be absent from the word. And mindful of that, if I don't respond, this may be why....

waterchan wrote:If the monk told her matter-of-factly, without unwholesome volition "You are homosexual because you committed adultery in a past life," then that is not technically unskillful behavior.

I don't care what 'volition' the monk had, what he said was not from the suttas, it was wrong, he should not have said it to wolf, and we here who are not so ignorant about these issues should not countenance such ignorance by justifying it in any way, especially as she has come here for help and support - just look at the title of her topic. In my case, I don't regard being bisexual as the result of bad kamma at all. I actually quite like it. I reckon I must have done something good to end up this way. So what if gays etc sometimes cop abuse? Lots of folks cop abuse. Many monks in Tibet got abused by the Chinese. Did they end up as monks due to bad kamma? This is ridiculous.

We are in the 21st Century here. Time to consign any trace of homophobia to the dustbin of history where it belongs.

manas.

Excellent post manas; I am with you all the way.

You will not be punished FOR your 'emotions'; you will be punished BY your 'emotions'.

Pay attention, simplify, and (Meditation instruction in a nutshell) "Mind - the Gap." ‘Absit invidia verbo’ - may ill-will be absent from the word. And mindful of that, if I don't respond, this may be why....

wolf1 wrote:and since it is a bad karma then is gay and lesbian sex are bad to the mind - and makes the Path slower?

I don't see why a person's sexual orientation would affect their ability to do Buddhist practice.

It should not, and does not.The problem we have here is that it would appear that a Monk placed his own bias into a specific recommendation to the OP, and thereby engendered a feeling of condemnation and guilt, by purporting to advise her that her homosexuality was as a result of poor actions in a previous life. Furthermore, it would appear by her account, that she was advised being homosexual is bad.

I cannot even begin to entertain such comments as being worthy of consideration.

You will not be punished FOR your 'emotions'; you will be punished BY your 'emotions'.

Pay attention, simplify, and (Meditation instruction in a nutshell) "Mind - the Gap." ‘Absit invidia verbo’ - may ill-will be absent from the word. And mindful of that, if I don't respond, this may be why....

Modus.Ponens wrote:How many eunuchs are in the western democracies? People in the west never committed this kind of bad karma that supposedly leads to be born as an eunuch?

The word "eunuch" is just the translation of the Pāli word "Pandaka." The Sayādaw's article was written many years ago. All sexual deviants: homosexuals, bisexuals, transsexuals, and eunuchs are included under the term Pandaka. See The Buddhist Monastic Code for details.

Bhante, The term 'deviant' is defined thus, in the World Oxford online dictionary:

Departing from usual or accepted standards, especially in social or sexual behaviour:

It seems to me that labelling people of different sexual behaviour, as 'deviants', is condemning them for having unacceptable standards, which seems unnecessarily harsh and judgemental....